Historians vs. George W. Bush
By Robert S. McElvaine
Mr. McElvaine teaches history at Millsaps College.
He is the author of EVE'S SEED: BIOLOGY, THE SEXES AND THE COURSE OF HISTORY (McGraw-Hill).

Although his approval ratings have slipped somewhat in recent weeks, President George W. Bush still enjoys the overall support of nearly half of the American people. He does not, however, fare nearly so well among professional historians.

A recent informal, unscientific survey of historians conducted at my suggestion by George Mason University¡¯s History News Network found that eight in ten historians responding rate the current presidency an overall failure.

Oh good lord, let me guess: PE and Music teachers rate his presidency a failure as well, right?

Geez, i dunno. Not a bad question ... i suppose. If you're all that keen, why not look into it ???

Well, would it be relevant toward anything? Do PE and music teachers necessarily know history? Is music and PE instructive in looking at the Bush presidency? Will the Bush years most likely be studied in history, PE, or music class?

I don't want to stir up trouble by quoting Chairman Mao, but someone is supposed to have asked him what he thought of Napoleon. He answered that it was too soon to judge Nappie's importance. (That's the version I heard anyway.)

He had a point. Two hundred years is a very short time in history. So how could you judge the importance of Bush who just started his second term? A wee bit premature, I'd say.